neuroimaging-qc

star 0

Evidence-based QC decision-making for neuroimaging data. Interpret QC metrics from any pipeline (fMRIPrep, MRIQC, FreeSurfer, MNE-Python, Homer3, custom outputs) to make justified inclusion/exclusion decisions. Covers fMRI, EEG, fNIRS, and structural MRI across populations (adults, infants, adolescents, clinical) and paradigms (resting-state, task, naturalistic, sleep). Use when filtering subjects based on QC outputs, setting exclusion thresholds, justifying QC criteria for methods sections, or parsing QC files programmatically with Python.

yibeichan By yibeichan schedule Updated 1/21/2026

name: neuroimaging-qc description: Evidence-based QC decision-making for neuroimaging data. Interpret QC metrics from any pipeline (fMRIPrep, MRIQC, FreeSurfer, MNE-Python, Homer3, custom outputs) to make justified inclusion/exclusion decisions. Covers fMRI, EEG, fNIRS, and structural MRI across populations (adults, infants, adolescents, clinical) and paradigms (resting-state, task, naturalistic, sleep). Use when filtering subjects based on QC outputs, setting exclusion thresholds, justifying QC criteria for methods sections, or parsing QC files programmatically with Python.

Neuroimaging QC Decision-Making

Evidence-based guidance for interpreting QC metrics and making principled inclusion/exclusion decisions.

Core Principles

1. No Universal Thresholds

QC thresholds are study-specific. Factors affecting appropriate cutoffs:

  • Population: Infants tolerate higher motion than adults
  • Paradigm: Task fMRI has different constraints than resting-state
  • Analysis: Connectivity analyses are more motion-sensitive than activation
  • Sample size: Stricter thresholds with larger N; lenient with small N

2. Distribution-Based Decisions

Always examine your sample's QC distribution before applying thresholds:

  1. Plot histograms of key metrics
  2. Identify natural breakpoints/outliers (>2-3 SD from mean)
  3. Apply literature-based thresholds as starting points, adjust based on distribution
  4. Report both threshold AND resulting exclusion rate

3. Multi-Metric Assessment

Never exclude based on single metric. Combine:

  • Motion metrics (FD, DVARS)
  • Signal quality metrics (tSNR, SNR)
  • Artifact indicators (outlier volumes, registration quality)
  • Visual inspection for edge cases

Decision Workflow

1. IDENTIFY your QC source
   ├── Known pipeline (fMRIPrep, MRIQC, etc.) → See modality references
   └── Custom/unknown output → Parse available metrics, map to known categories

2. CHARACTERIZE your study
   ├── Population: adult / pediatric / infant / clinical
   ├── Paradigm: rest / task / naturalistic / sleep
   └── Analysis: activation / connectivity / other

3. ESTABLISH thresholds
   ├── Start with literature recommendations (see references)
   ├── Examine your sample distribution
   └── Adjust based on trade-off: data quality vs. statistical power

4. APPLY and DOCUMENT
   ├── Generate exclusion summary
   ├── Report thresholds with citations
   └── Conduct sensitivity analysis with stricter/lenient thresholds

Quick Reference: Common Thresholds

fMRI Motion (FD)

Population Conservative Standard Lenient Citation
Adults (rest) 0.2 mm 0.3 mm 0.5 mm Power et al., 2012, 2014
Adults (task) 0.5 mm 0.9 mm 1.0 mm Siegel et al., 2014
Children (6-12y) 0.3 mm 0.4 mm 0.5 mm Fair et al., 2012
Infants 0.3 mm 0.5 mm Population-dependent
Neonates 0.2 mm 0.5 mm Smyser et al., 2010

Additional motion criteria:

  • fd_perc (% volumes > threshold): typically exclude if >20-50%
  • Maximum FD spike: consider >3-5 mm as problematic
  • Minimum usable data: ≥5 min for resting-state, task-dependent for task fMRI

EEG Amplitude (Peak-to-Peak)

Channel Type Reject Threshold Flat Threshold Notes
EEG 100-200 µV 1 µV Hardware-dependent
EOG 200-250 µV Blink detection
MEG (mag) 3000-4000 fT 1 fT Magnetometers
MEG (grad) 3000-4000 fT/cm 1 fT/cm Gradiometers

Additional EEG criteria:

  • Channel rejection: >20-30% bad epochs → mark as bad channel
  • Epoch rejection: typically accept 10-30% epoch loss; >50% problematic
  • Interpolation limit: ≤10% of channels can be interpolated

Structural MRI

Metric Direction Concern Level Notes
CNR (GM/WM) Higher better <2.5 Tissue contrast
SNR Higher better Site-dependent Compare within-site
QI1 Lower better >0.1 Artifact detection
EFC Lower better Outlier in distribution Ghosting indicator

Modality-Specific References

For detailed metrics, thresholds, and Python code:

Python Utilities

Scripts for parsing QC outputs and applying thresholds:

  • scripts/parse_mriqc.py: Parse MRIQC group TSV, flag subjects
  • scripts/parse_fmriprep_confounds.py: Summarize fMRIPrep confounds
  • scripts/qc_report.py: Generate QC summary reports

Methods Section Templates

fMRI QC Methods

Quality control was performed using [MRIQC/fMRIPrep] outputs. Subjects were 
excluded based on the following criteria: (1) mean framewise displacement 
(FD) > X mm [cite Power et al., 2012], (2) >Y% of volumes exceeding FD 
threshold of Z mm, or (3) visual inspection revealing [registration 
failures/artifacts]. This resulted in N subjects excluded (X% of sample), 
yielding a final sample of M participants.

EEG QC Methods

Continuous EEG data underwent artifact rejection using MNE-Python. Epochs 
containing peak-to-peak amplitudes exceeding X µV were rejected. Channels 
with >Y% rejected epochs were marked as bad and interpolated using spherical 
spline interpolation. Participants with >Z% rejected epochs or >N bad 
channels were excluded from analysis.

Handling Unknown QC Outputs

When encountering unfamiliar QC metrics:

  1. Identify metric category:

    • Motion/movement: Look for displacement, rotation, translation terms
    • Signal quality: SNR, tSNR, CNR, variance-related
    • Artifacts: Outlier counts, spike detection, artifact indices
  2. Determine directionality:

    • Higher-is-better: SNR, tSNR, CNR
    • Lower-is-better: FD, DVARS, artifact indices, outlier counts
  3. Establish thresholds:

    • Plot distribution, identify outliers
    • If metric has known analog, use those thresholds
    • Otherwise: use ±2-3 SD from mean as starting point
  4. Validate:

    • Cross-reference with visual inspection
    • Check correlation with known metrics
    • Verify excluded subjects are actually problematic

Population-Specific Considerations

Infants (0-24 months)

  • Higher baseline motion expected; adjust FD thresholds upward
  • Shorter usable data segments acceptable
  • Age-appropriate templates critical for registration QC
  • Sleep state affects data quality (deep sleep preferred)

Pediatric (3-12 years)

  • Motion decreases with age; consider age as covariate
  • Task compliance affects data quality
  • Mock scanner training reduces motion
  • Consider breaks during long protocols

Adolescents

  • Motion intermediate between children and adults
  • Developmental stage affects hemodynamics
  • Consider puberty stage as potential confound

Clinical Populations

  • Disease-specific considerations (lesions, atrophy)
  • Medication effects on signal
  • May need population-specific templates
  • Balance data quality vs. already-reduced sample sizes

Paradigm-Specific Considerations

Resting-State

  • Scrubbing viable (can remove timepoints)
  • Need minimum continuous/total duration (≥5 min recommended)
  • Strict motion thresholds (FD < 0.2-0.3 mm)

Task fMRI

  • Cannot arbitrarily remove timepoints
  • Consider motion relative to task timing
  • More lenient thresholds acceptable (FD < 0.5-0.9 mm)
  • Ensure sufficient trials survive exclusion

Naturalistic (movies, stories)

  • Long durations increase motion likelihood
  • Consider segment-wise QC
  • Drift artifacts more relevant

Sleep Studies

  • State-dependent QC (arousal events)
  • EEG quality for sleep staging
  • Movement during state transitions
Install via CLI
npx skills add https://github.com/yibeichan/claude-skills --skill neuroimaging-qc
Repository Details
star Stars 0
call_split Forks 0
navigation Branch main
article Path SKILL.md
More from Creator